Re: [Marxism] In Defense of Nadya Suleman (or, Hetero Breeding Running Amok)

["S. Artesian" <sartesian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

What you don't get is that "irresponsible breeding" is a social 
determination, based historically on class, race, and income-- that making 
an issue of one woman having octuplets and using the charged language that 
has, again historically, been used as weapons of social repression is 
irresponsible.

Your obvious moral prejudice-- "This woman's irresponsibility (which could 
easily turn into outright child abuse when her LITTER [empasis added, 
obviously] turns into teenagers..." is obvious and completely off the wall. 
What makes her irresponsible?  That she is poor?  Or that there are too many 
people in the world?  And what makes you think, as you obviously do, that 
because she has numerous children and she is poor that she could easily turn 
to child abuse?  And WTF is the point of using the word "litter" except to 
dehumanize a person, and her reproductive capacity, since it is a word 
specifically attached to animal reproduction?

Wonderful that you bring up China, which for a time imposed forced abortions 
on women.  That's real responsible.

You object to this woman's selfishness and stupidity?  No, that's not what 
you object to-- you object to this woman not conforming to your notions of 
proper reproductive responsibility .You think, clearly, that any hetero 
breeding is irresponsible-- "I know a number of hetero couples who have 
responsibly chosen not to have children because the world has enough of them 
already."  Now that's Malthusian garbage.

Hetero breeding running amok?  Oh boy, there's a threat to the world, 
heterosexual breeding. 


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu